Hong Kong on July 21 of the previous year, the Yuen Long white people attacked the public, eight white people were charged with rioting and other crimes, the case opened on Monday (22) in the District Court, two defendants Lam Kwun Leung and Lam Kai Ming pleaded guilty to rioting, the others denied the charges.
The eight defendants are Wong Chi-wing, Wong Ying-kit, Lam Kwun-leung, Lam Kai-ming, Tang Wai-sum, Ng Wai-nan, Tang Ying-bin and Choi Lap-ki, in that order. They were charged with participating in a riot and wounding with intent outside the MTR Yuen Long Station exit and in the Shape Point shopping mall on July 21 and 22 of the previous year.
Defendant Ng Wai Nam on February 22, 2021. (Photo by Lau Siu Fung)
Defendant Wong Ying-kit on February 22, 2021. (Photo by Liu Shaofeng)
Defendant Deng Yingbin on February 22, 2021. (Photo by Liu Shaofeng)
Defendant Deng Huaichen (left) on February 22, 2021. (Photo by Liu Shaofeng)
Defendant Wang Zhirong on February 22, 2021. (Photo by Liu Shaofeng)
Lam Kwun Leung, who reported being a car sales manager, and Lam Kai Ming, who was in charge of the barbecue, indicated that they would plead guilty to rioting and that the other charge of wounding with intent would be kept on file in court and not prosecuted.
The judge repeatedly questioned the lack of preparation of Senior Assistant Crown Prosecutor Chow Tin-hang on behalf of the Department of Justice, who spent more than two hours handling the document verification work. Including in the evening of last Friday (19) will be the revised case to the defense and the judge, the prosecution explained that because the revised case is not the main, only a few changes, the judge said the defense does not know the content of the changes, it is difficult to carry out the basis of a guilty plea, and said the court clerk has been constantly urged to wait a long Time also did not receive.
The judge said he had seen the list of witnesses submitted by the prosecution, all names are open to the public, asked whether the prosecution had asked the witnesses whether they can disclose their names, and whether they need a screen to hide their faces when giving testimony, the prosecution said other witnesses did not ask not to disclose their names, except for one witness, because he is still waiting to take a statement, the judge questioned the prosecution is not ready to open the case, and asked to call each witness before the intention to take a statement on their public identity in court The judge also asked that each witness be called to take a statement on their intention to disclose their identity in court.
The court dealt with the charges against the two defendants in the afternoon, the prosecution was again challenged. The judge asked the prosecution to submit the medical report of the injured person, and the prosecution said it had taken the wrong report and failed to describe the injuries of the witness, including the presence of stitches and after-effects. Under the judge’s questioning, the prosecution pointed out that the police in November of the previous year to obtain the witness medical report, but found that the wrong day to obtain the report, and the case has nothing to do with the police in December of the same year, until February 19 this year, the police found that the report is wrong, the judge questioned “a report put left into the refrigerator? A file was frozen? The report was only discovered after 1 year and 2 months, but it is not relevant? What are you doing in 14 months?” But the prosecution said “omitted”.
The judge also asked whether the prosecution had read the medical report, or copied the police information, according to the witness’s own description of the injury and testimony, the prosecution replied “yes”, the judge expressed surprise, asking “yes? Do you think not to look at the medical report? The witness is not a doctor, have the ability to see for themselves how the injury? So rock not rock?”
The judge asked the prosecution who is responsible for obtaining medical reports, the prosecution said the police officer is under the New Territories North General District serious crime, but did not disclose the name, asked to explain after, the judge asked “point of view? To tell me to listen to it can not? Public trial is not good to hand over paper boy.”
The judge asked the prosecution to submit additional information on March 19, including witness medical reports.
Chow Tin-hang is also responsible for the case involving Next Media founder Lai Chi-ying.
Recent Comments